Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/27/90 HASTINGS PLANNING COMMISSION Meeting of 8/27/90 The regular meeting of the Hastings Planning Commission was called to order by Commission Kaiser at 7:30 p.m. Members Present: Commissioners Ditty, Patzke, Reinardy, Kaiser, Featherstone, Anderson and Zender Members Absent: Commissioners Dredge and Cedar Staff Present: City Planner Czech Commissioner Kaiser called for additions or corrections to the minutes of the regular meeting of August 13, 1990. Commissioner Patzke requested that language be added to the special use permit for Haven Homes which indicates the assisted living units were outside the bounds of the original proposal. Czech indicated that a change is necessary for the zoning ordinance amendment for the R-7 district such that the front setback should read 5'-p and the side corner setback to read 5'-p and the height to read 40'-q. There being no further additions or corrections the minutes were approved as amended. Czech reviewed staffs August 18, 1990 memo to the Planning Commission regarding the proposed revisions to Chapter 13 of the Hastings Flood Plain Ordinance. Czech noted that these changes were necessary in order to remain in compliance with State and Federal standards. MINUTES PUBLIC HEARING FLOOD PLAIN ORDINANCE P~EVISIONS The public hearing was opened for comments at 7:35 p.m. There being no comments from the audience, the public hearing was closed. The Planning Commission briefly discussed with staff the proposed amendments. Commissioner Zender moved, Commissioner Reinardy made a second, to approve the following: ORDINANCE NO. , SECOND SERIES BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HASTINGS: CITY OF HASTINGS ORDINANCE NO. 257, FLOOD PLAIN REGULATIONS, IS HEREBY AMENDED AS FOLLOWS: A. Section 2.3 is amended to read as follows: 2.3 Rules for Interpretation of District Boundaries. The boundaries of the zoning districts shall be determined by scaling distances on the Official Zoning Map. Where interpretation is needed as to the exact location of the boundaries of the district as shown on the Official Zoning Map, as for example where there appears to be a conflict between a mapped boundary and the actual field conditions, and there is a formal appeal of the decision of the Administrator, the Board of Adjustment and Appeals shall make the necessary interpretation. All decisions will be based on elevations on the regional (100 year) flood profile and other available technical data. Persons contesting the location of the district boundary shall be given a reasonable opportunity to present their case to the Board and to submit technical evidence. B. Section 2.9 is amended to add the following definition: Variance - means a modification of a specific permitted development standard required in this ordinance to allow an alternative development standard not stated as acceptable by this ordinance, but only as applied to a particular property for the purpose of alleviating a hardship, practical difficulty or unique circumstance as defined and elaborated upon in M.S. 462.357. This definition shall apply only to the administration and enforcement of this ordinance. C. Section 4.36 is amended to read as follows: 4.36 Structural Works for Flood Control Structural works for flood control such as levees, dikes, and floodwalls shall be allowed only upon issuance of a Special Use Permit. A levee, dike or floodwall constructed in the floodway, shall not cause an increase to the 100 year or regional flood and the technical analysis must assume equal conveyance of storage loss on both sides of a stream. Flood control works shall also be subject to the provisions of Section 5.58. Any proposed work in the beds of public waters which will change the course, current, or cross- section of the waters shall be subject to the provisions of Minnesota Statutes 1969, C. 105 and other applicable statutes. Large scale community wide structural works for flood control intended to remove areas from the regulatory flood plain shall not be allowed in the floodway. Section 5.45 is deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following language: 5.45 StoraGe of Materials and EcnaiDment: (a) The storage or processing of materials that are, in time of flooding, flammable, explosive, or potentially injurious to human, animal, or plant life is prohibited. (b) Storage of other materials or equipment may be allowed if readily removable from the area within the time available after a flood warning and in accordance with a plan approved by the City of Hastings. E. A new Section 5.46 is added to Ordinance No. 247 and shall read as follows: 5.46 The provisions of Section 5.5 of this Ordinance shall also apply. F. Section 9.55 (5) shall be amended to read as follows: (5) Flood-proofing measures, in accordance with the State Building Code and this Ordinance. The applicant shall submit a plan or document certified by a registered professional engineer or architect that the flood-proofing measures are consistent with the Regulatory Flood Protection Elevation and associated flood factors for the particular area. G. Section 12.0 is amended to read as follows: Section 12.0 AMENDMENTS The flood plain designation on zoning maps shall not be removed from flood plain areas unless it can be shown that the designation is in error or that the areas are filled to an elevation at or above the flood protection elevation and are contiguous to other lands lying outside the flood plain district. Special exceptions to this rule may be permitted by the Commissioner of Natural Resources if he determines that, through other measures, lands are protected adequately for the intended uses. Ail amendments to this Ordinance, including amendments to the Official Zoning Map which would remove a flood plain designation from flood plain areas, must be submitted to, and approved by the Commissioner of Natural Resources prior to adoption. Changes in the Official Zoning Map regarding flood plain designations must meet the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) Technical Conditions and Criteria and must receive prior FEMA approval before adoption. The Commissioner of Natural Resources must be given 10 days written notice of all hearings to consider an amendment to this ordinance and said notice shall include a draft of the ordinance amendment. Upon vote taken, Ayes, 7; Nayes, 0. Czech briefly reviewed staffs August 18, 1990, memo to the Planning Commission concerning a draft ordinance which would create a minor subdivision section within Chapter 11 of the Hastings Subdivision Ordinance. Czech noted that this ordinance was necessary in order to have a formal review process for minor subdivision requests. PUBLIC HEARING MINOR SUBDMSION ORDINANCE The public hearing was opened for comments at 7:37 There being no comments from the audience, the public hearing was closed. p.me The Planning Commission interacted with staff concerning the proposed ordinance. Commissioner Patzke moved, Commissioner Zender made a second, to approve the following: ORDINANCE NO. - SECOND SERIES AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HASTINGS ADDING NEW CITY CODE SECTION 11.10; AND AF~ENDING THE EXISTING CITY CODE BECTIONS 11.02, AND 11.09~ ALL OF WHICH RELATE TO THE CREATION OF A MINOR SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE (WAIVER OF PLATTING REQUIREMENTS) REGULATIONS. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HASTINGS AS FOLLOWS: I. Hastings City Code is amended by adding the following new Section 11.10. Section 11.10 MINOR SUBDIVISION (waiver of Platting Requirements) to read as follows: Subd. 1. General. A minor subdivision may be initiated by the property owner(s) or authorized agent by filing an application with the Planning Department along with the fee(s) established by resolution of the City Council. A minor subdivision is limited to one (1) division of a parcel of land per twelve month period which results in no more than three (3) lots provided no new road is required and all lots created meet the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. It does not include any boundary/lot line adjustment approved pursuant to Subdivision 5 of this section. The minor subdivision or boundary/lot line adjustment shall not necessitate any additional public investment in new roads nor utilities to serve the lots. D. A minor subdivision is generally not intended for outlots nor commercial/industrial lands. Subd. 2. Application. An application for a minor subdivision/waiver of platting requirements shall include twenty (20) copies of a certificate of survey prepared by a registered land surveyor showing at a minimum the following information: Map specifications. Date; northpoint; legend; standard engineer's scale no less than one (1) inch equaling one hundred (100) feet, unless otherwise approved by staff. 2. Boundaries. The original lot lines; the proposed new lot lines; legal description of the existing and proposed property. 3. Easements. Existing and proposed easements and their dimensions. Existing Improvements. Names and locations of streets, drainage lines, sewer and water lines, other utilities, and structures within the proposed minor subdivision area. 5. Proposed Improvements. Location of proposed sewer and water lines, utilities, common facilities, driveways and structures. 6. Setbacks. Setback distance between existing/proposed structures and all lot lines. 7. Lot Areas. Existing and proposed lot(s) areas shown in square feet for each lot less than one (1) acre. 8. Supplementary Information. An affidavit by the applicant containing the exact names and addresses of all persons or entities having any type of ownership interest in the property. 9. Topography and other features as may be required by the City Engineer. 10. Any other information specific to the particular site and required for the complete evaluation of the application. Such information shall be supplied at the expense of the applicant. Subd. A. Be Ce 3. Review Process. The Planning Commission shall hold a public hearing on the application. Notice of the time and place of this public hearing shall be published once in the official newspaper and mailed to all property owners within 350 feet of the subject property. Both notices shall be given at least ten (10) days before the date of the hearing. The Planning Commission shall recommend to the City Council either approval, with or without conditions, or denial of the proposed minor subdivision within 60 days of when the completed application was accepted by the City Planner. If the Planning Commission recommends that the minor subdivision be denied, the Planning Commission shall set forth the reasons for its recommendation and forward them to the applicant and the City Council. The City Council may approve the request with or without conditions, deny it, refer it back to the Planning Commission for additional- input or study or require modification of the proposed minor subdivision. The City Council shall approve or deny the minor subdivision request within 120 days after the completed application has been accepted by the city Planner. Where public agencies other than the City have some form of jurisdiction over an area included in or directly affected by a proposed minor subdivision, approval of that minor subdivision may be conditioned on satisfaction of the requirements of the outside agency. Such agencies shall include but not be limited to Dakota County and Minnesota Department of Transportation, and the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. Subd. 4. Filing. ae If the application is approved and the City deems it appropriate, a Declaration of Minor Subdivision shall be prepared and signed by the City and all owners of the property. The Declaration of Minor Subdivision shall contain such provisions as deemed necessary by the City Council. The Declaration of Minor Subdivision shall be recorded against the property at the County Recorder's Office. The minor subdivision shall not become effective until the Declaration of Minor Subdivision has been signed by all property owners and recorded with the County Recorder's Office. If approval of the minor subdivision results in the creation of more lots than previously existed, the applicant shall be required to pay park dedication fees, interceptor sewer charges, and other applicable fees for each additional lot created as required by the city ordinances in effect at that time. Ce A declaration of minor subdivision or certified copy of the resolution waiving the platting requirements together with one copy of the certificate of survey, shall be recorded with the County. In addition, a copy of the certificate of survey shall be filed with the City. Proof of filing the resolution waiving the platting requirements shall also be submitted to the City prior to issuance of any building permits on the property. Subd. 5. Boundary/lot line adjustments. A. A boundary/lot line adjustment includes, but is not limited to, transfer of title of a portion of one parcel to an adjacent parcel. B. The City Planner can administratively approve a boundary/lot line adjustment subject to the following requirements: 1. Compliance with Subdivision 2 of this Section. A common property line between two adjacent parcels in the same zoning district may be adjusted, provided all resulting parcels conform with the Hastings Zoning Ordinance including minimum lot area and setbacks. In case of non-conforming lot(s), a boundary/lot line adjustment shall not result in increasing the non-conformity of either lot(s). 4. The City Planner can attach such conditions deemed necessary to protect the public interest. A boundary/lot line adjustment shall be deemed to occur when the deed transferring title is recorded with the County Recorder's Office. II. Hastings City Code is amended by adding the following new Section 11.02, Subd. 8.A. I I --I- ....... T .................................. III. Section 11.02, Subd. 8.A to read as follows: SUBD. 8.A. The term "owner" means the record owner, whether one or more persons, or entities of legal or equitable title to the property, but excluding those having such interest merely as security for the performance of an obligation or those having a lien upon the property by provision or operation of law. Hastings City Code Section 11.02, Subd. 10, is amended by adding the following new Section 11.02, Subd. 10E. Section 11.02, Subd. IOE, to read as follows: subdivision (waiver of platting requirements) line adjustment approved pursuant to Section Ordinance shall not be deemed a subdivision. E. A minor or boundary lot 11.10 of this IV. Hastings City Code Section 11.09 is amended to read as follows: SEC. ll. 09. CONVEYANCE BY METES AND BOUNDS. No transfer of ownership of land may occur in which the land is described: (1) by metes and bounds; (2) by reference to an unapproved registered land survey made after April 21, 1961; or, (3) to an unapproved plat made after the effective date of this Chapter. However, transfers of ownership of land may occur as allowed by Minnesota Statutes 1989, 462.358, Subd. 4b, (1), (2), (3), (4), (5), and (6) now in effect and as they may be amended, or was an approved minor subdivision (waiver of platting requirements) or boundary lot line adjustment approved pursuant to Section 11.10 of this Ordinance. VIOLATION A MISDEMEANOR. Every person violates a Section, Subdivision, Paragraph, or Provision of this Chapter when they perform an act thereby prohibited or declared unlawful, or fails to act when such failure is thereby prohibited or declared unlawful, and upon conviction thereof, shall be punished as for a misdemeanor, except as otherwise stated in specific provisions hereof. Adopted by the city Council of the City of Hastings this day of , 19__ This Ordinance shall become effective upon passage and seven days after publication. By. LuAnn Stoffel, Mayor ATTEST: Barbara C. Thompson, City Clerk Upon vote taken, Ayes, 7; Nayes, O. Czech reviewed staffs August 18, 1990 memo to the Planning Commission regarding a minor subdivision request by Joseph Meier for property located at Lots 5, 6 and the North 20 feet of 7, 14, and the North one half of 15, Block 6, Addition No. 13 to the City of Hastings. PUBLIC HEARING- MINOR SUBDMSION OLIVE/FRAZIER STREETS - JOSEPH MEIER The public hearing was opened for comments at 7:39 p.m. There being no comments from the audience, the public hearing was closed. The Planning Commission briefly discussed the proposed minor subdivision with Joe Meier and Czech. Commissioner Patzke moved, Commissioner Ditty made a second, to approve the minor subdivision subject to the following conditions: That Lot 5 and the North 10 feet of Lot 6, Block 6, Addition No. 13 be combined as one tax parcel at the time of recording/transferring property. That Lot 6, except the North ten feet thereof and the North 20 feet of Lot 7, Block 6, Addition No. 13 be combined as one tax parcel at time of recording/transferring property. 3e That Lot 14 and the North 1/2 of Lot 15, Block 6, Addition No. 13 be combined as one tax parcel at time of recording/transferring property. Upon vote taken, Ayes, 7; Nayes, 0. Czech reviewed staffs August 18, 1990 memo to the Planning Commission regarding a request by David Tanner, Attorney for Michael Siebenaler, for approval of a minor subdivision of two parcels located at 1350 and 1360 Blueberry Court. Czech noted that the PUBLIC HEARING- MINOR SUBDMSION 1350 & 1360 BLUEBERRY COURT SIEBENAT~/GO~T. minor subdivision was to allow for the realignment of two common lot lines such that Lot 20 would be reduced in size by 2,970 sq. ft. and Lot 21 increased by 2,970 sq. ft. The public hearing was opened for comments at 7:44 There being no comments from the audience, the public hearing was closed. The Planning Commission briefly interacted with Mr. Mr. Tanner indicated that the reason for the minor subdivision was that Mr. Siebenaler wanted a larger lot and Mr. Goebel wanted a smaller lot. Tanner. Commissioner Zender moved, Commissioner Reinardy made a second, to approve the minor subdivision subject to the following conditions: The applicant submit a revised survey which shows Mr. Siebenalers property at 1360 Blueberry Court as Parcel C and that language be added to the revised survey which ties together Parcel A and Lot 21 (Parcel C). That Parcel A and Lot 21 (Parcel C) be combined as one tax parcel at time of recording/transferring property. That Mr. Goebel submit a signed statement stating he did not object to the proposed minor subdivision submitted by Mr. Tanner on behalf of Mr. Siebenaler. Upon vote taken, Ayes, 7; Nayes, 0. Czech reviewed staffs August 18, 1990 memo to the Planning Commission concerning a request by Mike Nogle for approval of a one foot side corner setback variance for a home to be located at 1300 E. 3rd St. Czech noted that the home is proposed to be located nine feet from the west/side corner property line. Czech further noted that city code requires a 10 foot setback on side corners. VARIANCE-SIDE CORNER SETBACK- 1300 E. 3RD ST. MIKE NOGLE The Planning Commission briefly interacted with Mr. Nogle concerning his request and asked whether he felt comfortable with staffs conditions. Mr. Nogle indicated that he had no problems with staffs recommendation. Commissioner Anderson moved, Commissioner Featherstone made a second, to approve the variance subject to the following conditions: That the applicant construct the proposed home according to the submitted survey with the side corner/west setback being no closer than nine feet from the property line. 2. That the applicant adhere to all Uniform Building and Fire Codes. That the Barker Street right of way be kept clear. The applicant/resident at 1300 E. 3rd St. shall not store any items within the right of way. Upon vote taken, Ayes, 6; Nayes, 1 (Zender). Czech briefly reviewed staffs August 18, 1990, memo SITE PLAN-iI3/ to the Planning Commission regarding a request by Tom 117 W. 23RD ST. Judge for approval of a site plan for a four car TOM JUDGE garage to be located at 113/117 W. 23rd Street. Czech indicated that the legal description of the subject property is Lot 17, Block 4, Vermillion Addition. Czech noted that the garage is proposed to be located west of Judges Appliance and Refrigeration which is legally described as Lot 18, Block 4, Vermillion Addition. The Planning Commission interacted with staff and amongst themselves concerning the proposed site plan and expressed concerns regarding previous requests by Mr. Judge at this location. The Planning Commission asked if Mr. Judge was present and it was evident that he was not in attendance. The Planning Commission asked that staff check for previous files concerning the subject property. Commissioner Ditty moved, Commissioner Zender made a second, to table Mr. Judge's site plan request until Mr. Judge is present at the Planning Commission meeting to address the Commission's questions. Upon vote taken, Ayes, 7; Nayes, 0. Czech briefly reviewed staffs August 22,1990, memo to the Planning Commission concerning a request from Haven Homes Health Center for approval of a special use permit to allow an addition to the existing nursing home. Czech noted that the proposed addition would be attached to the existing 107 bed nursing home that is located on the subject site and that the number of beds would not increase as a result of the proposed addition. Czech noted that the applicant has withdrawn his request for a special use permit for the 24 unit "assisted living facility" and building height variance as well as the access proposal off of West 15th Street over city owned property. Czech noted that the third paragraph of staffs memo to the Commission contained a typo and noted that the last part of the paragraph which reads "and building height variance" should be eliminated as there is no building height variance request. Czech noted that the City Council reviewed this matter at its August 20, 1990 meeting and referred the amended proposal back to the Planning Commission for further review. The Planning Commission briefly discussed the amended special use permit. Mr. Tanner, Attorney for property owners adjacent to the subject site, indicated that his clients were not opposed to the proposed amended addition. Commissioner Patzke moved, Commissioner Anderson made a second, to approve the special use permit for ten 2-bed nursing home addition subject to the following conditions: SPECIAL USE PERMIT-NURSING HOME ADDITION- HAVEN HOMES HEALTH CENTER (LESTER FAIR) 930 W. 16TH That a site and building plan application be submitted for Planning Commission and City Council review. 2. That all existing tree/landscaping be retained on the site. 3. The number of beds not exceed 107 for the total nursing home. e That the height of the building not exceed 25 feet as determined by the Uniform Building Code. 5. Compliance with all Uniform Building and Fire Codes. Upon vote taken, Ayes, 6; Nayes, 0, Commissioner Zender abstained. Commissioner Patzke moved, Commissioner Reinardy made a second, to order a public hearing in order to review a request to rezone Lots 3 & 4, Block 136, Town of Hastings from I-2 to R-2. Upon vote taken, Ayes, 7; Nayes, 0. Commissioner Patzke moved, Commissioner Zender made a second, to order a public hearing in order to review a revised grading and drainage plan for Sunny Acres 4th Addition as proposed by Hastings Construction and Realty. Upon vote taken, Ayes, 7; Nayes, 0. Commissioner Kaiser asked the other members of the Planning Commission to consider a recommendation to the City Council to address the issue concerning senior housing and that an amendment be made to the City Code. The Planning Commission discussed this matter concerning senior housing. The Planning Commission also discussed whether it was appropriate to initiate the action themselves or to ask the City Council to initiate the action to amend the City Code. Commissioner Zender moved, Commissioner Ditty made a second, to recommend to the City Council changes to the City Code concerning Senior Housing. Upon vote taken, Ayes, 5; Nayes, 2 (Commissioner Patzke and Anderson). ORDER PUBLIC HEARING-REZONING 600 E. 7TH ST. WHITE ORDER PUBLIC HEARING-REVISED GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN- SUNNY ACRES 4TH ADDITION-HASTING CONSTRUCTION AND REALTY UPDATE/OTHER BUSINESS There being no further business Commissioner Patzke moved, Commissioner Zender made a second, to adjourn the meeting at 8:01 p.m. Upon vote taken, Ayes, 7; Nayes, 0. ADJOURNMENT